The Myth that Must DIE

The time has come.

It is time to put an end to the persistent and pervasive myth that will not die - the myth that until a person becomes a parent, s/he doesn't know what love is and doesn't know what it means to be a giving, selfless person.  I am sick to death of hearing this lie from celebrity moms who are on the front lines in spreading this garbage around (and news media outlets who eat it up), and I am equally sick of hearing it from everyday moms who think they are Mother Teresa for pumping out a unit (thanks, George Carlin).  With bags under their eyes, empty wallets, splitting headaches, and husbands who intentionally work long hours just so they can avoid coming home, moms everywhere are heard shouting from the rooftops that motherhood has transformed them from self-centered creatures, to "much better", "much less selfish", "more caring" people who "finally know what real love is".

Do moms love their kids?  Most do, and many love their kids deeply. (Many also resent them and regret having them, but that's another blog post).

Do moms have to sacrifice a great deal of themselves in order to raise children?  Absolutely.

Does being a mom result in a woman giving, giving, giving and giving some more?  Yep.

Does a mom have to give up many of the joys she once enjoyed, like keeping her appearance up, dining out with hubby, working out at the gym, relaxing without interuption, reading, napping, cooking sophisticated meals, shopping for herself...and on and on?  Affirmative.

Do moms have the corner on love? On caring? On sharing?  On selflessness? 

Absolutely not.

IT IS NOT SELFLESS TO MEET ONE'S RESPONSIBILITIES:  If a couple decides to have a child and bring a new life into the world, then that couple is responsible for caring for the child they created.  This caring will take a seemingly infinite number of forms, including feeding, dressing, bathing, changing diapers, wiping noses, bandaging cuts and scapes, doctor visits, expenditures of vast sums of money, teaching, correcting, scolding, praising, prodding, encouraging, cheuffering, PTA meetings, play dates and the list goes on and on and on.  These tasks will eat up most of the parents' life.  Does meeting these responsibilities make a person selfless?  NO.  It makes him responsible and there is a difference.

It is not selfless to bring a new life into the world and then take care of all the responsibilities that are created because of that choice.  A truly selfless person looks around and identifies already-existing people or other creatures who need help or care and then steps up to the plate and gives of themselves to help them. Taking this a step further, I would argue that considering how many truly needy people and creatures there are in the world, and taking into account that the world is already straining under the weight of overpopulation and the destructive and dire effects of global warming, bringing more people into the world is a truly selfish act, and one which should be actively discouraged rather than encouraged, praised and glorified to the point of absurdity the way it is.

PARENTS DO NOT HAVE THE MARKET ON LOVE, CARING AND SELFLESSNESS:  Contrary to the negative stereotypes parents like to hurl around about the childfree, we do not live in a bubble where we exist only for ourselves.  Only in our dreams are we lying around in bed all day, being fed bon-bons and brought tropical drinks by a cabana boy.  We have jobs, and mortgages and bills to pay and most of us are not rolling in dough.  It is not all about me, me, me.  We are spouses.  We are significant others.  We are siblings.  We are sons and daughters. We are grandchildren.  We are friends. We are aunts and uncles.   We are companions to animals.  We are volunteers in our communities.  We are dedicated employees and many of us are teachers, firefighters, EMTs, doctors, therapists and other caring professionals.  There are many roles in life that allow a person to express love, caring and selflessness and being a parent isn't the only role in life that makes that possible.

IN MANY WAYS, PARENTS ARE MORE SELFISH THAN THE CHILDFREE:   Let's face it.  Parents have children for themselves, not for the children.  They want to have a "family".  They want to experience being a parent.  They want someone to carry on their name.  They want to relive their childhood.  They want to have a helpless little being to love and they want to be loved by this little person.  They want a little Mini-Me who can reflect themselves back like a mirror.  They want someone to take care of them in old age.  They want to be a grandparent someday.  They want to fit in and be a validated member of the Parent Club. They want to feel the accomplishment of "having it all".  These are all selfish motivations and are all about me, me, me.  The unborn, non-existent child does not need to be created, so it is ridiculous to argue that having a child is a selfless endeavor.

IN MANY WAYS, THE CHILDFREE ARE MORE SELFLESS THAN PARENTS:   Whereas the majority of a parent's life, energy, time and resources are used up caring for her children and the responsibilities that exist in the insular family bubble she has created, the childfree's resources can be directed outward.  Childfree folks make great spouses and partners because their love, energy and attention is fully focused on the other person.  They are not distracted by needy, draining third parties.  The childfree are helpful to their parents, since their lives are not bogged down with childrearing responsibilities. The childfree make great friends.  They truly listen.  They care.  They are available.  Want to do something, go somewhere, plan something?  They are up for it and will likely have the time and money. Call them on the phone and you will have their full attention the entire phone call.  They are fun to talk to because they are able to stay up on current events and remain interesting conversationalists.   The childfree make great employees.  They can be counted on to arrive on time, well-rested and alert, work their full shift, fully focused on the tasks at hand, and are often available to work overtime when needed.  Finally, by nature of not being overwhelmed with childcare responsibilities, the childfree are able to be more involved in their communities and with volunteer activities to make the world a better place for everyone.

Despite everything mentioned above, parents still get to prance around emblazoned with the Selfless Saint Martyr Medal, while the childfree continue to fight off the barrage of relentless negative judgements and perceptions of us as selfish, immature, materialistic hedonists.  Our only consolation is that our ranks are growing and more and more attention (much of it positive!) is being paid to us in the media.  Through in-person meetups, childfree blogs, discussion forums and online social networking, we are connecting, supporting and providing validation to each other.  We are mirroring each others' feelings, thoughts and observations. 

Most importantly, we are no longer alone.

IVF: Getting into the God Business

When the Octomom story broke a number of months ago, my head was spinning at the revelation that a fertility doctor had implanted an unemployed, single mother (who already had 6 children and who was sponging off her parents, living in their small 3 bedroom house) with 8 embryos. Somehow the doctor's behavior seemed even more insane to me than the behavior of Octomom herself which says a lot. The story got a ton of media - all the talking heads were flapping their gums (and wagging their fingers) over it, but we never did hear from the doctor himself, did we? No, he avoided the limelight, probably because he knew his behavior was nothing short of criminal. The man should have been thrown in jail.

I haven't written about the subject of in vitro fertilization (IVF) before today, but it's been on my blogging back burner. Thankfully, two of my readers e-mailed me to vent about the subject and their eloquent letters (which they permitted me to reprint below) raise some very interesting questions and I'd love to hear your thoughts:

Is in vitro fertilization in line with "God's plan"? (assuming one believes in God)

Is IVF an act of selflessness, or selfishness?

Is having children an entitlement? Is the capacity to give birth a medical necessity? Should health insurance companies be required to cover IVF?

Are those who pursue IVF (and the docs who perform this procedure) "playing God"?

By the way, thank you to ALL the readers who contact me with blog post ideas or forward links to me. I save them in a little file called "Blog Post Ideas" and my folder is getting pretty big. I plan to dip into it on a regular basis. Please continue to send me your ideas, letters, links and vents. You can reach me at firecracker_mandy(at)yahoo(dot)com.

And now to the letters of our esteemed readers, HawkMom and Shrodinger's Kittens (thanks, ladies).

Hi,

I'm a mother (obviously) but I just love reading your Childfree blog. I've been to other places that just rant about "greedy moos". I don't take it too personally, though, as I've heard from some childfree acquaintances that parents are often self-righteous and arrogant towards them. All of what you say is spot on. When having children, you gain a lot emotionally and spiritually (if you're into that), but you give up a lot more. If kids were adults, we wouldn't put up with them. It's all take, take, take. I adore my girl to pieces, though, so I don't mind being temporarily insane for the next 18 years, which is basically what parenting is. I'm okay with that. : )

Anyway, I was about to write a post on my own blog about IVF and fertility treatment. I've written about it before and commented on forums, but I was charbroiled beyond recognition. These ladies are brutal. I'm in a weird place, as I am unapologetically pro-choice. However, fertility treatments in general make me uneasy. I'm one of those natural birth loons, so forgive me in advance, but I do find it offensive that many of the same women pumping themselves full of hormones and graded embryos are rallying against gay marriage and abortion as "against God's plan". Hypocrisy much? I lost a friend over this recently, when she found an old blog entry of mine. As diplomatically as I could, I explained to her in an e-mail back-and-forth that her twins (formerly triplets) were more the result of her selfish desires, that her PCOS was not a life-threatening disease comparable to cancer, and I just couldn't sit back and pretend that she was selfless and brave, no matter how many treatments she went through. She had "no regrets" over the fact that one of her babies died before the end of the first trimester and another one almost died in utero, spending the first few weeks of his life on breathing machines, clinging to life. She said she would do it all again, because I "wouldn't understand" what it's like to want something so many other women can have. The jaw drops when I think about this. I did apologize for offending her, if that helps. I thought you may understand my perspective, because those of us who have biological children or don't want any altogether are forbidden to have an opinion. I was actually searching your archived posts for something about the topic. I have to go run some errands now, but I was wondering if you could link me up to an old entry or if you were interested in writing about it in a newer post. My interest in all of this has been piqued even more with that recent mix-up in Wisconsin.

HawkMom

______________________________________________________

Every time I see an article that argues assisted reproductive technologies should be covered by insurance I can't make a coherent argument. It makes me too angry. Covered by insurance? It should be illegal. Nobody ever died from not having a baby. And then you get a situation like Jon and Kate--note in the article when they started trying for another baby she told the doctor she would not selectively reduce. This is the thing I hate most about assisted reproduction: for some reason your body is not able to sustain an embryo or bear a child, but we can chemically torture it into doing what it shouldn't, all because society says you are a failure as a woman if you don't pursue every possible option to get a baby, no matter how impractical or expensive or detrimental to your health. Look what Science can do for you! Oh, so many beautiful babies! It's a miracle!

Then a few months later the doctor sits them down and says, "You have to think about selective reduction. There are too many embryos," And mommy and daddy say, "Oh, teehee, I can't play God!" Guess what, you got into the god business when you started this chain of events. Everyone screams about their right! to have a baby, but nobody wants to take the responsibility. So God, in the guise of the taxpayers, pays for their defective litter that's plagued with physical problems and learning disabilities. Because no sacrifice is too great for a baby, especially if other people do the sacrificing.

So where does it end? Thanks for letting me rant, I apologize if I got wordy, but I thought you might have something (more coherent and less ranty) to say about this article if you hadn't seen it already. Take care.

Shrodinger'sKittens

The Selfish Assumption

CFVixen sent me an interesting article on CNN.com entitled What's so Wrong with Being Selfish? The author of the article defends childfree folks against the accusations that we are selfish with this simple argument, "Yeah, we're selfish. So what?" She wants people to get over the fact that childfree folks are out having fun instead of suffering at home wiping runny noses and poopy asses. Live and let live.

I know the author means well and I generally like the article, however, I do have a bone to pick. She declares that childfree folks are selfish (a very tired stereotype), the underlying assumption being that parents are not. This is where I take issue with this article and if I have to keep arguing this point over and over like a broken record, I will. Parents are just as selfish as childfree folks. Can anyone see this besides me? Parents don't have children so they can toil, suffer and sacrifice. They choose to have kids for the joys they believe they will get out of it. Childfree folks choose to live a life sans children for the same desire to live a joyful life. We all want to be happy and joyful and we pursue the life that we believe will make us feel that way. Pursuing a happy life is not selfish, it's just the point of living. Why would someone want to pursue a life that didn't make them happy?

However, despite the fact that both childfree folks and parents live the way they do because they are in pursuit of a happy life, the two groups are judged very differently. Parents are ascribed positive traits - giving, caring and selfless, while the childfree are called selfish. And why? Because people who have kids have to trudge through a boatload of misery to obtain the joy and happiness they seek, whereas childfree folks sail effortlessly to their goals.

If pursuing a happy life is selfish, then parents are at least as selfish as childfree folks, if not more. What could be more selfish and narcissistic than bringing another child into an already overpopulated world when there are so many homeless orphans clamoring for loving homes? What could be more selfish than creating a little mini-me (instead of adopting) because you want a little replica of yourself? What could be more selfish than wanting someone who needs you, who depends on you, who looks up to you, who you can mold and shape into what you want so you can feel good about yourself? What could be more selfish than creating a human being so that you can add some meaning to your life? Or so you can live vicariously through her? What could be more selfish than bringing another consumer into a world whose resources are growing more scarce by the day?

Need I go on?

Childfree folks are always, automatically assumed to be selfish, even by people who should know better (like the childfree author of the article in question), while the parents are selfish angle almost never gets explored. Frankly, I am tired of it. So I am going to keep exploring it and exploring it even if I have to beat it like a dead horse. Yes, childfree folks live fun lives and everyone should get over it. But don't exclaim "yeah, I'm selfish - get over it" unless you also exclaim, "and you're selfish too". The truth is, we're happy living our fun childfree lives and we hope you're happy living your life of ass and nose wiping. To each his own.

And then, there's this final point: I may not be wiping noses and asses all day long, but that doesn't mean my life revolves only around myself or that it's all about me. I am a wife, a daughter, a sister, a niece, an aunt, a friend, a companion of house cats, and an employee. In each of these roles I am devoted, caring, committed and engaged and I give of myself every day. To label me selfish because I have declined to participate in one specific type of caring role - the parental role - is ludicrous. It is akin to calling someone a picky eater because they don't like Hamburger Helper, even though they eat everything else in the cupboard.

Parent Worship Further Deconstructed

I hope you don't mind, but I would like to take my previous discussion about Mother's Day a little further. This subject really knaws at me and the more I think about it, the crazier it makes me, so bear with me. I'd like to examine this "worship your parents and be eternally grateful to them" ideology a little more closely because I think it needs to be critically deconstructed a bit more.

As I touched on in the previous post, our culture (and probably most cultures) relentlessly promotes this idea that parents, by nature of bringing us into the world and taking care of us, deserve undying gratitude and honor for all eternity. They are beings to be worshipped, respected and appreciated for all they have sacrificed for us. Parenthood is the highest calling in life, the greatest role one can pursue and so on.

I've already argued that excessive gratitude to parents for caring for their kids is uncalled for, since having a child is a choice, and once you have one you must take care of it. You are simply carrying out your duties.

My argument today is that all of this excessive worship of parents is misplaced because people have children and take care of them, not for selfless, saintly, self-sacrificing reasons, but to satisfy their own selfish desires - to fulfil wishes for all sorts of self-gratifying things - receiving unconditional love, feeling needed and important, enjoying the activities of "family life", carrying on a last name, gaining acceptance into society via conformance, feeling a sense of accomplishment (since having children is equated with "having it all" and accomplishment in our culture), having a caretaker in old age, and on and on and on - the list is truly endless. People do not have children because they are selfless beings who want to struggle and sacrifice themselves for the betterment of the world or to help a needy person. They may enjoy thinking of themselves this way, but parents are not Mother Teresa. A selfless being does not reproduce and bring more people into the world when the world is already overpopulated with millions of needy, homeless children rotting away in orphanages, clamoring for homes. A selfless being does not need a genetic mini-me who reflects herself back like a mirror for the purpose of self-admiration and worship.

Perhaps I am over-analyzing here, but to me this whole parenthood = sainthood ideology is such a ridiculous and obvious sham, it makes my head spin. It is particularly irritating to me as a childfree person because so frequently the childfree get slapped with the selfish label, while parents walk around wearing a badge of sainthood for this phoney, non-existent selflessness - taking care of the little creations they made to satisfy their selfish desires.

And let's not forget the fact that our self-congratulating parents never asked for our permission to bring us into the world, and yet we are commanded to be grateful that they produced us, as if life on Earth is the best thing going. Maybe it's not - we have no way of knowing. One thing we know for sure is that every human being who is born is born with a death sentence.

The bottom line is, people have children for themselves - for everything they will get out of it and for all the ways they think parenthood will benefit them and make them happy. So putting parents on this pedestal of sainthood for the purpose of expressing undying gratitude and appreciation is simply wrong on every level.

A Closer Look at Mother's Day

Today is Mother's Day and across the nation, women are being worshipped and showered with love, praise, attention and gifts for no other reason than for the fact that they reproduced.

This has me thinking. Why is parenthood the only role that gets honored with a special holiday? I am a wife, a daughter, a sister, a niece, an aunt, a friend, an employee and the caretaker of 3 cats, and yet none of these roles has been deemed worthy for me to get a national holiday. Okay, I do get honored on my wedding anniversary, but that's by hubby only. There is no national holiday called "Wife's Day".

The idea behind Mother's Day and Father's Day is that moms and dads deserve to be honored because their role is the ultimate in sacrifice. They do so much for us that we must show our appreciation. A national holiday is in order.

I don't think anyone would disagree that parents do so much for their kids (if they are parenting correctly, anyway) but here's my question. Why should a person be honored and worshipped for taking care of their responsibilities? A person makes the choice to reproduce and bring another person into the world, so shouldn't it be expected that they will take care of the being they produced? It's not some heroic act of charity and kindness that propels them into caring for their children - it's duty. Do they really deserve a national holiday to thank them for meeting their responsibilities? We have 3 cats who we chose to bring into our household, so we take care of them. I feed them twice a day, hubby cleans their litterboxes and we give them lots of love and attention every day. This is the responsibility that comes along with having pets and we knew this going in. We chose to have them, so we must take care of them properly. That makes us responsible. It doesn't make us saintly or deserving of a national holiday to celebrate the wonderfulness that is the pet owner.

It all comes back to the persistent mythology in our culture which defines parenthood as the most saintly, selfless and important role a person can undertake in life. Because it often does not feel that way to parents (many of them are miserable, run down by the day-to-day grind of caring for kids, and know their motives for having kids were selfish and not saintly), this positive reinforcement is necessary to sustain the mythology, thus ensuring that more and more people breed and bring more and more consumers into the world who will eventually purchase lots and lots of stuff (Mother's Day cards and gifts, for example).

Courage and Childfree Honesty

Did you ever notice that most childfree people feel the need to be self-deprecating when explaining their status? For example, a person will explain that he is childfree because he isn't parent material - he can barely take care of his houseplants. Or - here's one you hear a lot - "I'm too selfish to have kids" (the next time I hear a childfree person say this, I swear I am going to smack her). Even our friend George Clooney, who I just featured in my Childfree Celebrity Spotlight, while vocally childfree, was careful to point out that he doesn't have the qualities that are required for being a good parent and described how much he admires people with those qualities. In other words, "parenthood is wonderful, but I'm not wonderful enough to be a parent". We all understand why childfree folks are self-deprecating. Withering under the harsh glare of critical outsiders, it makes us less uncomfortable, and makes our childfree status more palatable, if we laugh it away as a character defect.

For once, I would like to hear a childfree person stand up proudly and tell the truth instead of soft-pedaling and dishing out what they think people can stomach. For once, tell them how great childfreedom is, how we're not childfree because we lack some elusive qualities, but because we are blessed with an abundant ability to think for ourselves and choose wisely. And while you're at it, tell them how we really feel about parenthood. I am going to start. Would you like to join me? If so, please post your own statement in a comment.

This is my declaration of childfree honesty:

I am childfree because I think parenthood is the most over-rated and over-glorified brainwashing scam human beings have ever fallen prey to. While there are certainly intrinsic rewards to being a parent, a careful analysis reveals that the cost is far higher than the rewards. I am childfree because life is short and and there are simply many more things I would rather do than to take care of children.

I do not think having a child makes a person selfless and I am keenly aware of the selfishness that motivates people to have children. Both childfree and parents choose to live the life that they believe will make them the most happy, which probably makes both selfish. The difference is, the childfree lifestyle choice is kinder to our planet and childfree people have more time to dedicate themselves to selfless activities which better society as a whole.

I choose not to have children because I think the childfree life is preferable, not because I don't have what it takes to be a good parent. Over the years, many have told me I would make a great mom and evaluate me as "mom material". I am nurturing. I love children and they gravitate to me. I am sensitive to their needs and educated about child psychology and development. I treat children with respect and kindness and I bring out the best in them. I enjoy their company, but I don't need to have them around me 24/7 in order to feel I have a purpose in life. I have come to realize that I enjoy children precisely because I am not a parent.

I do not hold the opinion that everyone should be childfree, but I think our world would be heck of a lot better off if more people were. Although parents would like us to believe that they are making a huge contribution to humanity by having children, I do not share that opinion. Our planet is overpopulated, overheated and overpolluted to the point that we are teetering on the edge of extinction, not to mention that when I look around at most people, I think at least 60% of them have no business being parents. Witnessing the dysfunctional interactions with their children, it's likely their children will grow up to be detriments to society, rather than contributors to it. And let's face it, although every parent likes to dream that her child will be the one to grow up to cure cancer, the odds of that are 1 in a million - actually higher when one considers that there are almost 7 billion people living on the planet and we're still waiting for that cure. As George Carlin says in one of my favorite stand-up routines, "Kids are like any other group of people - a few winners, and a whole lot of losers."

I do not perceive reproduction and childbirth as a "miracle", nor do I see it as an accomplishment, although most parents enjoy thinking of it this way for obvious reasons. Reproduction is a biological function common to all living beings and frankly, it's so ordinary. Dogs do it. Rats do it. Mosquitoes do it. I am far more impressed with people whose accomplishments actually require some talent, intelligence, effort and thought.

My declaration may seem harsh, but at least it's honest. You will never hear me say, "I'm too selfish to have kids", "I wouldn't make a good mom", "I am lacking all those wonderful qualities that parents have" because if I did, it would be a load of horseshit. The truth is, I have plenty of wonderful qualities, am no more selfish than the next person, and would make a great mom if I chose to be one. I choose not to be one because I am happier just the way I am.

Thank you for indulging me. I will now step off my soap box.

Over the Coals

She's baaaack.

In this interview, Ann Curry rakes Nadya Suleman over the coals about irresponsibility and selfishness. It is fascinating to listen to Suleman's rationale in explaining how she is not irresponsible and selfish.

Suleman states she currently has no income coming in (except for her children's disability payments and food stamps). She was using student loans to support her family, but at this point that source of money has dried up (incidentally, aren't there any rules regulating the use of student loans for purposes other than school?). At the same time, she explains that she is responsible because she will be able to support her children once she is finished school in a year or so.

Question #1: how does she expect to pay for her final year of graduate school when she's used up her student loans to support her family?

Question #2: If she has no source of income right now, how will she support her family while she is finishing up her graduate degree and then trying to find a job?

I guess that's where the media comes in - the book deals, the magazine deals, the interview deals, the reality show, the Lifetime Movie of the Week. Face it, you know they are coming. In fact, just this week it was reported that she's been offered a cool million to star in (of all things) a porn film. Let's also not forget her Beg-a-Thon website with PayPal functionality as well. Oh, and her poor friends, family and church members who have to step up to the plate to support her egregious lifestyle.

And this, above all, is what enfuriates me - that obscene selfishness and irresponsibility gets rewarded in our culture; that when all is said and done, it's all about MONEY (and ratings); that people who live responsibly and within their means have to work their asses off for every dollar they get, while narcissistic, self-absorbed nutcases like Nadya Suleman get everything handed to them on a silver platter.

Selfish Saints

Now that I am completely (and sadly) out of vacation mode and have slipped fully back into my curmudgeonly American persona, it's time for another rant! (Hurray! Admit it, your life has been lacking without them).

As you know, there are many things that perplex and fascinate me about the subject of parenting and motherhood and which I like to complain about in this blog - our media's fixation on celebrity breeding; noisy, obnoxious parents polluting our environment with their self-absorbed entitlement. The usual suspects. There's another topic, though, that I haven't touched on too much and it deserves some attention - the engrained, persistent notion of motherhood as sainthood.

To be a mother in our culture (and in most cultures) is to wear a badge of the highest honor. To become a mother is to receive instant esteem in our culture. Motherhood is equated with (among other things) goodness, virtue, selflessness, sacrifice, femininity, wholesomeness, and even patriotism. A woman becomes pregnant and the seas part - she is an instant celebrity - parties are thrown, she is showered with gifts and heaped with praise about how beautiful, how glowing, how magnificent and miraculous she is. She becomes an instant lifetime member of the Mom Club - a group whose members fawn over each other and hang on each other's every word. No wonder so many women can't wait to be mothers!

It doesn't stop there. For the rest of her life, she will have special stature. She will have a special holiday just for her and will be held in high regard simply because she reproduced. She will always be held up as the example of caring, compassion and selflessness. Her status as mother will be such a badge of honor that for the rest of her life she will be known as a mother first before anything else. She will find tons of validation and support everywhere she looks as her choice to reproduce is celebrated in every facet of culture, community, religion and the media. For crying out loud - she will even get her own premium parking spot. Never will her role be questioned or criticised, for motherhood is the sacred cow that is never spoken of in any terms other than those of reverence and endearment (well, except maybe on childfree blogs).

Well, I would like to take this opportunity to challenge the foundation of this mythology about motherhood. My argument? Mothers cannot be saints because they are selfish.

It begins with the decision to reproduce and bear biological children rather than opting to adopt one of the millions of homeless and orphaned children waiting for a home - orphans whose adoption would not only be a great benefit to the children, but to our environment, since the more children who are adopted (and the fewer who are newly bred), the lower the world's population and the less negative impact on the environment. After all, there is a direct connection between world population and the looming destruction of the planet. Global warming is a testament to this.

Women (and men) decide to have children for a plethora of reasons and most of those reasons are selfish. They want a little being who will love them more than anyone. Selfish. They hope for a little "mini me" who will (hopefully) reflect themselves back like a mirror - a little carbon copy of themselves. Egotistical and selfish. They want someone to carry on their name. Egotistical. They want to relive their childhood because they really don't enjoy being adults. Selfish. Their lives are empty and meaningless and reproducing is a quick remedy which requires little thought, talent or consideration. Lazy and selfish. They hope to have someone to take care of them in old age. Selfish. They long for the acceptance and status that comes with parenthood. Selfish. They want their lives to be full of activity and excitement. Selfish. They love the idea of family and all the warm, fuzzy notions that accompany it - holidays with a big family around the table, vacations to Disney World, traditions like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Selfish. Shall I go on?

Claiming that a parent or mother is selfless is akin to saying that I am generous because I pay my mortgage. I chose to purchase my home, therefore I am responsible for paying my mortgage. Paying my mortgage makes me responsible, not generous. Likewise, people who choose to bring children into the world and then exert all of their time, effort and money to care for them are not selfless. They are responsible. And sadly, many parents cannot even lay claim to being responsible (the aforementioned orphans are a testament to this). There is a clear distinction between selflessness and responsibility and it's a distinction that has to be made.

I am tired of hearing childfree folks referred to as selfish (not only by parents, but often by themselves). I am tired of parents (and especially mothers) getting all this phoney worship for being selfless when their motivations to live the way they do are no less selfish than mine. We all choose to live the life that we think will make us the happiest and for this we are all inherently selfish. It's not necessarily a bad thing to be selfish, but we need to get real about what selfishness and selflessness are and who possesses these traits (we all do) and we also need to get real about who is a saint (none of us).